Muthupandi v. The Deputy Superintendent Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:15.12.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN

1. Muthupandi

2. Uchi Mahali

3. Pitchumani

4. C.Sathya Muthuraman @ Karthik ... Petitioners Vs.

1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Munneerpallam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

In Crime No.428 of 2023 3.Kannan ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the entire records pertaining to the proceeding in Crime No.428/2023 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Munneerpallam Police Station, Tirunelveli District, and quash the same as against the petitioner.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Anand For R1 : Mr.M.Vaikkam Karunanithi Government Advocate (Crl.side) For R2 : Mr.Uthiran

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition is filed to call for the entire records pertaining to the proceeding in Crime No.428/2023 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Munneerpallam Police Station, Tirunelveli District, and quash the same as against the petitioner. 2.The contention of the petitioners is that based on the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent registered the First Information Report in Crime No.428 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 323 and 506(ii) of IPC read with Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 against the petitioners. 3.The further contention of the petitioners is that they compromised the issue with the 2nd respondent amicably. A joint memo 2/5

of compromise was filed, which has been duly signed by the petitioners and the 2nd respondent and also by their respective counsels. 4.The petitioners and the 2nd respondent appeared before this Court along with their counsels and also produced their Aadhar cards. They were also identified by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the Investigation Officer. Both the parties were enquired by me and they accepted the terms of compromise. Learned Government Advocate confirmed that the defacto complainant has not received any compensation from the Government. Hence, the Compromise Memo is recorded.

5.Considering the totality of the circumstances, the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioners and also in view of the joint compromise memo, dated 14.12.2023, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the matter pending. Hence, all further proceedings in Crime No.428 of 2023 pending on the file of the 1st respondent police is quashed and the compromise memo is recorded. 3/5

6.In the result, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the entire proceedings in Crime No.428 of 2023, pending on the file of the 1st respondent police is hereby quashed in respect of the petitioners and the terms of joint compromise memo shall form part of this order. 15.12.2023 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No pnn To 1.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Munneerpallam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

In Crime No.428 of 2023 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

4/5

G.ILANGOVAN ,J.

pnn 15.12.2023 5/5